Makalede Uşak Müzesi’nin arkeolojik taş eser bölümünden iki başlık tanıtılmaktadır. Başlıklar, dörtlü sütunce şeklinde biçimlendirilmiş taşıyıcılarıyla monolit olup özel bir başlık biçimi sergilemeleri nedeniyle beraber ele alınmaktadır. Mimari bir kontekst içerisinde bulunmamışlardır. Müze kayıtlarında sadece bir tanesinin geliş yeri belli olup Frigya Sebastesi’ne 9 km. mesafedeki Sivaslı/Ağaçbeyli’den geldiği kaydedilmiştir. Orta Bizans mimari plastiğinin klasik motiflerini taşısalar da biçim ve bezeme uygulanışı açısından sıra dışıdırlar. Her ne kadar başlık tipleri kendi içerisinde çok çeşitlilik gösterse de söz konusu başlıklar başlık ve taşıyıcı arasında bir ara ögenin mevcudiyetiyle yaygın başlık tiplerinden farklı bir özellik göstermektedirler. Başlıklardan birini kabaranın ana motif olması sebebiyle ‘kabaralı başlık’, belli bir tipolojiye oturtulması zor olan diğerini ise arkad motifinden ve üstteki sepeti andıran kısmından dolayı ‘kalathosu arkad frizli başlık’ kategorisinde ele alınabilirler. En iyi ve öncelikli karşılaştırma örnekleri Sebaste kazılarından gelir. Hatta Sebaste’deki bir kilise için başlıkları günümüze ulaşmamış düğümlü dörtlü sütunceli templon taşıyıcıları (10. yüzyıl) öngörülmektedir. Burada ele alınan başlıkların sütuncelerinin nasıl biçimlendirildiğini bilmesek de boğumlu veya düğümlü olmaları muhtemeldir.
This article introduces two capitals from the archaeological stone artefact section of the Uşak Museum. The capitals are monolithic, with their quadripartite columnar supports, and are studied together due to their unique forms. The capitals were not found in their architectural context. According to the museum records, only one has a known place of origin, which is Sivaslı/Ağaçbeyli, 9 km away from Phrygian Sebaste. Although the capitals date back to the Middle Byzantine period and reflect common workmanship features, they differ in form and decoration style. While the types of capitals show great variety within themselves, these particular capitals exhibit a feature with an intermediate element between the capital and the support, distinguishing them from common capital types.
One of the capitals has a prism at the bottom; the main capital sits above it, and it ends with an abacus. The horizontal cross-section of all the elements of the capital is square. The other capital consists of two parts in a roughly square prism shape, lacking an abacus. There is an intermediate element resembling the column rings with a circular cross-section between the support and the main capital. The definition used for a similar capital from Apamea serves as a reference for these two examples, which exhibit significant formal differences. Accordingly, the four-shaft column (either a column or pier) can be divided into parts as a prism-shaped table between the capital and the support, a comparatively high ring, and the capital itself. Apart from the four-shaft columnar support, another common element of the two capitals is the transitional component between the main capital section and the support. It takes the form of a prism with greater volume in one of the capitals, while it resembles a ring-like base plate in the other. Since both the base plate and the ring are used separately in each capital, it would not be incorrect to define this component as a transitional element. These formal definitions align with the concepts found in the capital typology of the period, which is based on distinctions made according to decorative elements and includes column capitals as well. Examples where a multi-columnar shaft is monolithic with the capital are rare. The number of such capitals from Asia Minor is slightly higher when compared to the only two known examples from the eastern Black Sea region and Greece.
As the cabochon is the main motif on one of the capitals, it can be considered in the category of “cabochon capital”; in contrast, the other capital, which is difficult to classify within any specific typology, can be classified as a “capital with arcade friezed kalathos” because of the arcade motif and the kalathos formed in the part above.
In one of the capitals, inlays most likely made of a different material were placed into drill-carved cavities on the square table decoration. The drill work between the bands and braids of the kalathos closely resembles the arch fragments found inside the tomb at the northern corner of the church’s narthex during the excavations conducted between 1966 and 1970 in the Sebaste, southeast of Selçikler, Uşak. It is possible that this example also featured glass inlays in the arch corners and in the medallion sequence decorating the arch.
For the templon (10th century) of a church in Sebaste, reconstructed on the basis of the in situ stylobate, knotted colonnettes have been proposed. This inevitably raises the question of how the supports were terminated. The often-cited unscaled reconstruction drawings depict the supports terminating in central knots. While comparative parallels exist for such a configuration, there are also instances where the knot does not coincide with the midpoint, where the support features multiple knots or is entirely knotted, or where the support is, instead, connected by a cubical intermediary block resembling the body of a capital. Although how they were designed may not be known, the shafts of these capitals discussed here may be knarled or knotted.
Traces on the surfaces of both capitals reveal that they were subsequently altered, most likely in adaptation for secondary use outside their original architectural setting. This possibility precludes the establishment of firm connections with the liturgical furnishings of the churches in Sebaste. Nevertheless, in terms of ornament, stylistic character, craftsmanship, and proportions, they may be regarded as products of the region’s artistic milieu. Their significance lies in their capacity to illuminate the broader corpus of Byzantine architectural sculpture in western Asia Minor.
| Primary Language | Turkish |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Art History |
| Journal Section | Research Article |
| Authors | |
| Submission Date | June 13, 2025 |
| Acceptance Date | September 1, 2025 |
| Publication Date | December 30, 2025 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2025 Volume: 34 Issue: 2 |